DR. DEEPAK MADAN vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21.08.2025 + W.P.(C) 12679/2025 & CM APPL. 51719/2025 DR. DEEPAK MADAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Arpit Bhalla and Mr. Lakshay Kaushik, Advocates versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dheeraj Singh, Advocate with Mr. Deepali Verma, Advocate for R-1 to 4. Mob: 9968225268 Email: [email protected] CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J: (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the Communication dated 23rd December, 2024, and the Notice dated 11th August, 2025, issued by the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), with respect to the property bearing no. BG-6/250-B, Paschim Vihar, Delhi-110063. 2. It is submitted that in the Notice dated 11th August, 2025, issued to the petitioner, the respondents have mentioned some previous date on which the MCD had allegedly booked the property in question. 3. However, it is submitted that no such order or notice for booking was Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 1 of 3 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:23.08.2025 13:32:40 received by the petitioner ever, and thus, Principles of Natural Justice, have not been complied with. 4. It is submitted that the property in question was demolished on 16th May, 2025. It is further submitted that at that time also, no notice had been served. It is submitted that it is only now, on 11th August, 2025, that the petitioner has received the Notice under Section 435 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (“DMC Act”). 5. Thus, it is submitted that upon receipt of the aforesaid Notice, the petitioner herein has filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal MCD (“ATMCD”) on 18th August, 2025. 6. It is submitted that the pre